The irrational failure to act

Philosophical Quarterly (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I defend against a salient objection the thesis that practical rationality requires us to perform intentional actions. The objection is that if rationality requires the performance of intentional actions, then agents are irrational for failing to succeed in what they intend to do. I reply to this objection by hewing closely to the principle that the rational ‘ought’ implies ‘can’. We are rationally required not to successfully realize the content of our intentions but to exercise the fallible abilities in our possession. Taking this line permits us to agree that we are not irrational for failing to succeed, while also endorsing the anti-Internalist claim that practical rationality embraces intentional actions themselves, rather than merely the beliefs and intentions that prompt and sustain them.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,394

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-04-11

Downloads
18 (#1,114,171)

6 months
11 (#348,792)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Matthew Heeney
Nazarbayev University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Agents’ Abilities.Romy Jaster - 2020 - Berlin, New York: De Gruyter.
The nature of ability and the purpose of knowledge.John Greco - 2007 - Philosophical Issues 17 (1):57–69.
All Reasons are Fundamentally for Attitudes.Conor McHugh & Jonathan Way - 2022 - Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 21 (2).

View all 18 references / Add more references